The Princess (2022), a review
Since 2017, it is my belief that 25% of all media created has been, in some way, related to Diana Spencer, the Princess of Wales. At least, in the five-year span proceeding the 20th anniversary of her death in 1997, the Princess Di market has been oversaturated with movies, televisions shows, news segments, podcasts, books, and like the subject of this review, documentaries. Which is why HBO’s The Princess (2022), a nearly 2-hour documentary concerning the world’s favourite dead royal, feels flaccid.
In the past decade or so, documentaries that exist mostly as meta-analyses of their subject have become a much more normal segment of the genre. While historically, pop biographies dabbled in this style, there has been a rise in nostalgia focused media and active public relations campaigns via the cinema. One of the more obvious examples of this would be the pop star documentary.
You know the type. Some rising star - a Justin Bieber for example - is followed for an extended period of time, usually around a tour, and given ‘humanity’. They cry through an emotional moment, they triumph on stage, they discuss their tragic backstory. Jennifer Lopez recently capped off an incredibly strong multi-year media campaign with her own documentary if you required a recent example. But the goal is always sympathy to the subject.
These films exist in the framework of Madonna’s 1991 documentary, Truth or Dare. In it, you see the pop legend at her best and worst. She throws random jabs at Oprah, she performs at maybe the height of her talents, and in other scenes wanders backstage to roll her eyes at her boyfriend Warren Beatty’s discomfort. It’s genuinely revealing in both the best and worst way. You walk away knowing Madonna more intimately, despite her clear performance throughout. Most of its offspring fail to meet that brilliance.
Part of it is structure. While some people have legitimate ability to speak candidly, or have just existed in singularly interesting circumstances, many celebrity stories are repetitive. During a recent trip, I read the biography of Margaret Campbell, an early 20th century socialite who divorced the Duke of Argyll. In theory, her life story is compelling and shares obvious parallels to Diana, which the biography outlines extensively. In practice, writing a biography around a series of interviews with an elderly woman with little self-awareness is boring. Many people just don’t have the capacity for personal insight.
Amy (2015) is a useful of example of how to handle a subject without their own words being necessary. The answer is archival footage. Produced by some of the same team as its spiritual successor Whitney (2018), the film follows the titular jazz and pop star from her humble beginnings. She lives, she devours, she struggles, she dies. All the while the building tension of paparazzi, money making, and addiction surround the increasingly vulnerable woman at the centre.
It’s devastating.
The Princess, a HBO production, attempts a very similar approach. It essentially drops you into her role as Princess, and never steps out of that box. Much like Diana Spencer’s life in the spotlight, it’s claustrophobic and invasive. But unlike Amy, this film doesn’t feel nearly as impactful.
Part of the problem is just what it’s about. Look at the title. The Princess. This is not actually a film about the Lady Diana Spencer - wife, mother, divorcee, and activist. Her wants and desires play little into the narrative the story is telling. This is a film about, or rather a montage of, the media obsession with the Princess of Wales. There are no interviews. No break in the action. It’s just an onslaught of news stories, paparazzi footage, home videos and whatever else existed in 1997 to showcase just how much she was observed.
In an era where the phrase “I don’t want to be perceived” has become a meme, this feels incredibly disrespectful and out of step with the times. It’s a particularly short-sighted approach. The film frames itself as “intimate”, but intimate to whom? Not Diana, who is quite literally treated as an object. Not the media, who do not speak in their own defence.
It’s all archival - nobody speaks.
There’s also the issue of structure. Without interviews that documentaries generally use to transition from beat to beat, this film relies on news coverage to do the same. On one hand, this is clearly for immersion. Moment to moment, it’s incredibly effective. But by the halfway point, its exhausting, and not in an empathetic way to Diana.
But the biggest crime here is monotony. There are three parts to every retelling of the Diana story, and this is the middle part. When it comes to the stunning revelation that – gasp – she was exploited by the media, it doesn’t hit the way it clearly is intended to. This is barely a montage in the Netflix series The Crown, let alone enough for a feature length production.
These problems might have been excused if the film had any sort of unique insight. Unfortunately, it’s just kind of vapid. A clip of its subject that hadn’t been seen a million times elsewhere, an angle of any kind. Diana was not just a media sensation without humanity, she was an adult woman with real depth. We all know the media is bad, we all know the narrative changed the moment she died. Either show us why or show us her.
If this wanted to be a documentary about the media circus, it should have gone there. A refusal to interrogate those in power hampers what is its only purpose. Other documentaries have handled paparazzi better. Framing Britney Spears (2021) asks them to answer questions directly. Amy (2015) makes you hear their victim struggle against the pressure. The Princess (2022) just…shows you they exist.